E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics
Volume 11, 2010
http://asa.aip.org
160th Meeting
Acoustical Society of America
Cancun, Mexico
15 - 19 November 2010
Session 4pAB: Animal Bioacoustics
4pAB7. Construction, calibration, and field test of a home-made, low-cost hydrophone system
for cetacean acoustic research
Eduardo Romero Vivas* and Braulio León López
*Corresponding author’s address: Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste CIBNOR,S.C., Mar Bermejo
195 Col Playa Palo de Santa Rita, La Paz, 23090, BCS, Mexico, evivas@cibnor.mx
Marine Mammals are reliable bioindicators of aquatic ecosystems health. Since cetacean highly relay on the use of sound
for conspecifics interaction, feeding, and navigation, research in bioacoustics becomes fundamental to unravel the influence of anthropogenic activities on their environment and vocal behaviour. Unfortunately, the widespread of studies in
this area are often limited for the lack of affordable equipment. This paper first describes how to build a low cost
hydrophone suitable for cetacean acoustic research and then shows how to perform hydrostatic pressure tests and acoustic
calibrations using easily available tools. Finally, field recordings of individuals of two dolphin species: long-beaked
common dolphin (Delphinus capensis) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) in La Paz Bay, Baja California Sur,
Mexico using the proposed hydrophone and a professional hydrophone system [AQ-1s and ITC-1042 transducers (10 Hz 100 kHz)] are compared.
Published by the Acoustical Society of America through the American Institute of Physics
© 2011 Acoustical Society of America [DOI: 10.1121/1.3573502]
Received 30 Oct 2010; published 12 Mar 2011
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 1
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
INTRODUCTION
Marine mammals are known as important bio-indicators of the health of aquatic ecosystems. Cetaceans
(whales, dolphins, and porpoises), in particular, use sound for many vital activities, such as navigation, feeding,
group cohesion, and communication [1, 2].
The sounds produced by cetaceans covers several octaves, from very low frequencies made by large whales
to high frequency echo location signals by toothed whales, although much of this sound production is located in the
human audible frequencies (20 Hz–20 kHz). Within the group of toothed whales (Odontoceti), the Delphinidae
family (dolphins) is well known for their vast vocal repertory. Although, there are important variations among
species, their vocalizations have been categorized as pulsed and tonal sounds [1]. Pulses are used mainly for echo
location, while tones are related to social contexts and communication. Tones, also commonly called “whistles”, are
produced in the range of 300Hz–24 kHz [1, 3]. With their high dependence on sound, research in bioacoustics
becomes fundamental for unraveling the influence of anthropogenic activities on their environment and vocal
behavior [1, 4–7].
Bio-acoustics has played a major role in cetacean research during the last few years. Unfortunately,
specialized equipment for this remains accessible only to projects with big budgets, usually in countries that have
strong support of science. Emerging research groups interested in doing studies in this area often see the cost and
availability of specialized equipment as a limitation.
This work provides instructions on how to build a low-cost hydrophone, how to perform static pressure
tests on it with tools that are widely available, and how to do a simple frequency response calibration within the
human audible range. This study also compares field recordings of whistles of two dolphin species using this lowcost hydrophone and a second hydrophone, which has already been used in cetacean research (lent by the Marine
Mammals Research Program of the Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur and belonging to the Scripps
Whale Acoustics Lab) [8]. Our purpose is not to claim that our “home-made” hydrophone can substitute for
professional equipment, but to provide essential tools that hopefully will broaden the research in this area by making
basic equipment available for researchers with limited resources.
CONSTRUCTION
Several prototypes of home-made low-cost hydrophones can be found on the internet [9–12] and in
literature[13, 14], but from the ones we have found that use widely available and easy to find materials, none
provided calibration curves nor comparison to professional hydrophones on cetacean field recordings. Barlow et al.
[14], for instance, provide calibration curves for their array, but it requires a special hydrophone element. Goodson
and Lepper [13] proposed a hydrophone that fulfills criteria of low-cost and easy-to-find materials, but neither its
technical nor field performance is available. The approach followed by the Submarine Boat website [9] is very
similar, but no technical or field performance for cetacean research is offered. Other approaches go from the
standard microphone immersed in oil inside a canister, as in “Instructables” [10], to the sealed epoxy solutions, such
as the “Dunking hydrophone” [11].
The hydrophone proposed here has a similar design to those found in [12, 13], which might be based on the
former design, but it has two main differences. The design proposed avoids the entry hole for the cable and the
epoxy seal on the back disk, as proposed in [13], and a compression fitting for the interface cable, as suggested in
[12]. In the first case, the design was modified because sealing with epoxy does not a absolute guarantee, and in the
second case, because compression fittings are not always easy to obtain. Another difference from previous designs is
the use of small O-rings that fit into the screws. In the original design, the front disk movement was restricted in one
direction for the screw heads. The new design allows the same conditions on both sides of the vibrating disk.
Parts List:
1 Piezoelectric ceramic disk. It can be obtained from a greeting card, a buzzer, or a Radox 066-648 (3.5
inchs, 4-8 , 150 W tweeter). Piezoelectric elements are also available from Carrod Electrónica [15],
Steren® [16], Radioshack® [17], Maplin® [18], Conrad® [19], and others [20].
2 Acrylic, Plexiglas, polycarbonate plastic, or similar (3–5 mm thick disks of 71 mm diameter)
1 O-ring (2-inch diameter, 0.2-inch thick).
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 2
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
8 Bolts (3/4 × 1/8 inch and corresponding nuts)
8 O-rings (1/4 inch diameter) to fit around the bolts
1 drill bit (9/64 inch)
1 drill bit (7/64 inch)
1 telephonic cable (2 wires), shielded if possible
1 audio plug (3.5 mm)
1 needle
Superglue (Kola-Loka®)
Cut 2 disks of 71 mm of diameter from the plastic sheet using a 2 ¾ inch diameter hole saw, and finish the
rough edges using a sander. Mark 8 equally spaced points around the disks where the bolt holes will be drilled.
Drill bolt holes in both disks at the same time using the 7/64 inch drill bit. Mark the disks to make sure the
holes match during assembly. Now, drill one of the disks using the 9/64 inch drill bit. The piezoelectric element will
be glued to the disk with the larger bolt holes. Spread the superglue on the piezoelectric element and glue it to the
center of the disk with the larger bolt holes. Make sure there are no bubbles trapped between the disk and the
piezoelement.
FIGURE 1. Completely assembled low-cost hydrophone. Note the wires going through the main O-ring and the smaller O-rings
for each bolt.
Use the needle to pierce two holes through the 2-inch O-ring to pass the wires, stretch a bit the O-ring if
necessary. Solder the wires to the piezoelectric element; the positive wire goes to the ceramic disk and the negative
to the outer brass ring. Lay the O-ring symmetrically around the piezoelectric element and cover with the other disk.
Insert the small O-rings into the bolts. Insert the bolts in the disk from the outer side, keeping the piezoelectric
element inside both plastic disks. Hold in place the nuts and tighten alternating opposite screws. Do not over-tighten.
The O-ring must touch the plastic disk in a line of 1 or 2 mm only that will seal properly. Finally, solder the audio
jack in place.
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 3
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE TEST
For this type of hydrophone, it is necessary to make sure that the air cavity stays sealed at the high
pressures under immersion. As in previous designs [12], [13], the critical sealing part is the entry hole for the cable.
To determine if the hydrophone leaks at depth, a do-it-yourself hydrostatic pressure test apparatus was also
designed. Figure 2 is a diagram of the main elements.
FIGURE 2. Apparatus for testing hydrostatic pressure.
The device (Figure 2) consists of a hydraulic pump (1) coupled with a pressure chamber made of a plastic
container (2). A manometer (3) and a pressure release valve (4) complete the design. The hydrophone is first placed
into the plastic container (2) filled with oil, then the excess air is removed through the pressure release valve (4).
With the valve (4) closed, pressure is increased using the hydraulic pump (1). The hydrophone was tested up to 5
kg/cm2, equivalent to a depth of 40 meters and remained at this pressure for 24 hours. The 5 kg/cm2 limit was set by
the container, not the hydrophone. A piece of paper inside the hydrophone was used to test the sealing. No oil
entered the cavity.
The system described can be used with few modifications to perform infrasound and low sound frequency
range calibration at elevated static pressures in a pendulum chamber [21].
CALIBRATION
Assuming that acoustical impedance of the hydrophone is high enough so that its radiation impedance can
be neglected and that the diffraction phenomena can be neglected over the frequency range from 400 Hz–7 kHz in
which measurements are performed, then the receiving sensitivity of the hydrophone would be the same in air as it is
in water [22]. With this assumption, the hydrophone was calibrated at sonic frequencies.
A Sony XS-L100P5M loudspeaker and feed from a Wavetek Model 145 function generator was used as a
constant sound pressure force. The sound pressure level acting on the hydrophone was measured using an Iso-Tech
SLM-1352A (ANSI S1.4 type 2) sound level meter. To measure the open circuit voltage, a GW Instek GDS-1022
digital oscilloscope/FFT analyzer was connected to the output of the hydrophone and sound level meter. To find the
sensitivity of the hydrophone, a sinusoidal waveform at 1 kHz at 94 dBc was applied to the loudspeaker and the
voltage received by the hydrophone was measured. The sensitivity obtained was 10.2 mV/Pa.
For a reference of 1 V/Pa, the receiving frequency response of the hydrophone in air is shown in Figure 3.
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 4
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
FIGURE 3. Frequency response of the low-cost hydrophone
FIELD TESTS: SOUND PRODUCTION OF COMMON AND BOTTLENOSE
DOLPHINS
The long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) are
two widely distributed species that live tropical and temperate waters in pods from a few to hundreds of individuals
[2]. Both species are important links in the food chain in the Gulf of California [23, 24]. The bottlenose dolphin
vocal repertory is a well-studied topic worldwide [25–27]. To assess the performance of the hydrophone under real
conditions with subjects in their habitat, whistles of this two dolphin species were recorded.
Study Area
Bahía de La Paz is located near the southeast end of the Baja California Peninsula (24.1ºN–24.8ºN,
110.2ºW–110.8ºW), covering ~1970 km² (Figure 4). The bay is a shallow marine depression, getting progressively
deeper from south to north, with a slope of ~1% until it reaches 500 m at the northern end [28]. The region is hot in
summer and warm to cool in winter, is generally arid. Average salinity is 36 and average annual rainfall is 210 mm,
usually occurring in summer tropical storms. Other than during summer tropical storms, runoff is very uncommon
[29, 30].
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 5
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
PacificOcean
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 4. Location of Bahía de La Paz of the Gulf of California (A). Bahía de La Paz is delimited by Isla Espiritu Santo (B).
Field excursions on Bahía de La Paz were aboard a small vessel with outboard engine (Marine Mammals
Research Program, PRIMMA-UABCS). The study area was covered with random transects to monitor for dolphins,
mainly near Isla Espíritu Santo. When a pod was located, geographic position, time, number of individuals, and
species were recorded. The engine was turned off and 3-min recordings were made at a sampling rate of 96 kHz at
24 bits, using a Fostex® FR-2 digital recorder. The professional hydrophone (ITC-1042 transducers 2–100 kHz) and
the low-cost hydrophone were connected to the left and right channels, respectively, and submerged to 4 meters. The
gain for both channels was adjusted to provide comparable levels to compensate for the low-cost hydrophone lack of
a preamplifier. Similar procedures were conducted for both species.
Signal Processing
Spectrograms were generated using the Raven®Lite v1.0 software to find whistles and Raven®Pro v1.3 Trial
Version to measure parameters of each whistle [31]. The spectrograms obtained showed that it was possible to
record dolphin whistles and sounds up to 48 kHz with the low-cost hydrophone. The sampling frequency was
limited by the selected sampling rate, rather than by the hydrophone capabilities (see Figure 5). This is important
because social sounds above 20 kHz in whistles occur in other dolphin species [32]. Many pulsed sounds of dolphins
are found at frequencies higher than 20 kHz [1].
A couple of whistles from each species containing a clear and well-defined contour were selected for analysis.
For each of them, 7 parameters commonly used in the bioacoustics literature to categorized whistles were derived
automatically: beginning frequency, ending frequency, maximum frequency, minimum frequency, duration, peak
frequency, and average power [33].
Figures 6 and 7 show, for comparison, the whistle spectrograms recorded using the low-cost hydrophone and the
professional equipment for both species. Under visual inspection, the main features of the whistles are clear in both
spectrograms. Moreover, Table 1 and Table 2 show that the parameters measured, using Raven®Pro software, were
the same for both hydrophones, apart from the difference in average power due to the different gain set for each
channel.
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 6
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
(a)
(b)
1
3
2
3
FIGURE 5. Spectrogram of vocalizations of Delphinus capensis recorded by the professional hydrophone (a) and by the lowcost hydrophone (b). Notice the presence of high frequency burst pulses (1), clicks (2), and whistles (3). Spectrogram settings:
1024 point FFT, Hanning window, 50% overlap.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
FIGURE 6. Spectrograms of two Delphinus capensis whistles recorded by the professional hydrophone (a, b), and by the lowcost hydrophone (c, d). Spectrogram settings: 512 point FFT, Hanning window, 50% overlap. The parameters measured for these
whistles are presented in Table 1
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 7
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
TABLE 1. Measured parameters of Delphinus capensis whistle recordings from two hydrophones
Low-Cost
Professional
Low-Cost
Professional
Hydrophone (c)
Hydrophone (a)
Hydrophone (d)
Hydrophone (b)
Beginning frequency
15118 Hz
15118 Hz
9423 Hz
9423 Hz
Ending frequency
18715 Hz
18715 Hz
8834 Hz
8834 Hz
Minimum frequency
9908 Hz
9908 Hz
7698 Hz
7698 Hz
Maximum frequency
18715 Hz
18715 Hz
17660 Hz
17660 Hz
Duration
0.669 s
0.669 s
0.719 s
0.719 s
Peak frequency
10687 Hz
10687 Hz
13312 Hz
13312 Hz
Average power
112.3 dB
115.2 dB
108.4 dB
111.0 dB
Parameters
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
FIGURE 7. Spectrograms of two Tursiops truncatus whistles recorded by the professional hydrophone (a, b), and by the lowcost hydrophone (c, d). Spectrogram settings: 512 point FFT, Hanning window, 50% overlap. The parameters measured for these
whistles are presented in Table 2.
TABLE 2. Measured parameters of Tursiops truncatus whistle recordings from two hydrophones
Low-Cost
Professional
Low-Cost
Professional
Hydrophone (c)
Hydrophone (a)
Hydrophone (d)
Hydrophone (b)
13488 Hz
13488 Hz
17280 Hz
17280 Hz
Beginning frequency
8400 Hz
8400 Hz
7920 Hz
7920 Hz
Ending frequency
8400 Hz
8400 Hz
7920 Hz
7920 Hz
Minimum frequency
26400 Hz
26400 Hz
17280 Hz
17280 Hz
Maximum frequency
1.518 s
1.518 s
0.409 s
0.409 s
Duration
26250 Hz
26250 Hz
10875 Hz
10875 Hz
Peak frequency
78.4 dB
80.2 dB
80.2 dB
79.0 dB
Average power
Parameters
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 8
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
CONCLUSIONS
The low-cost hydrophone that we designed can be constructed with readily available materials and tested
for static pressure resistance and human audible range performance by using simple equipment and techniques.
Although its use and performance for dolphin whistles was demonstrated, it could be used in studies of other species
(cetacean and non-cetacean) for underwater recordings within the frequency range of human audibility and beyond.
In our opinion, it is a good low-cost alternative to expensive equipment for bio-acoustics cetacean research at the
entry level.
FUTURE WORK
Calibration in water for ultrasound and infrasound frequencies for instance reciprocity and pendulum
pressurized chamber methods is required. A built-in preamplifier might also be needed to use longer cables for
deeper immersions and longer ranges.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Jorge Urbán and Lorena Viloria of the Marine Mammals Research Programme (PRIMMA) of the
Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur for their help during the field test and for letting us use their acoustic
research equipment provided by the Whale Acoustic Lab of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography. Ira Fogel of
CIBNOR provided useful editorial suggestions.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
W. J. Richardson; C. R. Green Jr.; C. I. Malme and D. H. Thomson, Marine Mammals and Noise, San Diego, CA:
Academic Press, 1995, pp 159-238.
W. Perrin; B. Würsing and H. Thewissen (eds.), Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 2002,
pp. 1414.
D. K. Mellinger; K. M Stafford; S. E. Moore; R. P. Dziak and H. Matsumoto,”An overview of fixed passive acoustic
observation methods for cetaceans”, Oceanography 20, 36-45 (2007).
E. Parson and S. Hung, “Cetaceans and Noise in Hong Kong: A case study”, Policy on Sound and Marine Mammals: An
International Workshop, 2004, US Marine Mammals Commission.
T. Morisaka; M. Shinohara; F. Nakahara and T. Akamatsu, “Effects of ambient noise in the whistles of Indo-Pacific
bottlenose dolphins populations”, Journal of Mammalogy 86, 541-546 (2005).
S. Ribeiro; F. Viddi and T. Freitas, “Behavioural responses of chilean dolphins (Cephalorhyncus eutropia) to boats in
Yaldad Bay, Southern Chile”, Aquatic Mammals 31, 234-242 (2005).
F. H. Jensen; L. Bejder; M. Wahlberg; N. Aguilar-Soto; M. Johnson and P. T. Madsen, “Vessel noise effect on delphinid
communication”, Marin Ecology Progress Series. 395, 161-175 (2009).
Scripps Whale Acoustics Lab, 2007, available at: http://cetus.ucsd.edu (accessed November 2010)
Submarine Boat, available at: http://www.submarineboat.com/hydrophone.htm (accessed November 2010)
Instructables, 2010, available at: http://www.instructables.com/id/Underwater-Microphone-Hydrophone/ (accessed
November 2010)
A. Bray, 2006, available at: http://www.exfac.com/aussie_bray/hydro_dunking.htm (accessed November 2010)
G. Gantschnigg, 2006, available at: http://www.gantschnigg.net/doku.php?id=hydrobioakustik:diy_hydrophone_en
(accessed November 2010)
A. D. Goodson and P. Lepper, “A cheap sensitive hydrophone for monitoring cetacean vocalisations”, Loughborough
University of Technology. Signal Processing Resaerch Group-Underwater Acoustic Group,1-4 (1995)
J. Barlow; S. Rankin, and S. Dawson, A guide to constructing hydrophones and hydrophone arrays for monitoring marine
mammal vocalizations, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS, 2008.
Carrod Electronica, available at: http://www.carrodelectronica.com/store/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=14656
(accessed November 2010)
Steren, available at: http://www.steren.com.mx/bocinas/interior3.asp?pdto=80-1005N (accessed November 2010)
Radioshack, available at: http://www.radioshack.com (accessed November 2010)
Maplin, available at: http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=3202 (accessed November 2010)
Conrad, available at: http://www.conrad.de/ce/de/suggest/piezo%20element (accessed November 2010)
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 9
E. Romero Vivas and B. Leon Lopez
20. Ekulit, Piezo element data, available at: http://www.produktinfo.conrad.com/datenblaetter/700000-724999/712943-an-01en-Piezo_Element_EPZ_35M_S29.pdf (accessed November 2010)
21. A. N. Golenkov and Y. G. Rachkov, “Broadening of the frequency of hydrophone calibration”, Izmeritel’naya Tekhnika 4,
69-70 (1983).
22. Brüel & Kjær, “Introduction to underwater acoustics. Hydrophones: Their characteristics and applications. Calibration
Technics”, Application notes, Nærum, Denmark, 067-80.
23. G. Heckel; P. Ladron de Guevara and L. Rojas-Bracho, “Ballenas y delfines”, in Bahía de Los Ángeles: recursos naturales y
comunidad, edited by G. D. Danemann and E. Ezcurra, Mexico, D.F: Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales,
2008, pp. 567-568.
24. R. Marcín, “Modelado espacio-temporal del uso del hábitat del tursión (Tursiops truncatus) en relación a factores de
impacto en la Ensenada y Bahía de La Paz, B.C.S., México”, Sc.D Thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur,
La Paz, Mexico, 2010.
25. L. S. Sayigh; P. L. Tyack; R. S. Wells; M. D. Scott and A. B. Irvine, “Sex difference in signature whistles production of
free-ranging bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus”, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 36, 171-177 (1995).
26. J. L. Miksis; P. L. Tyack and J. R. Buck, “Captive dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, develop signature whistles that match
acoustic features of human-made model sounds”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 112, 728-739 (2002).
27. V. M. Janik; L. S. Sayigh and R. S. Wells, “Signature whistles shape conveys identity information to bottlenose dolphins”,
Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences USA. 103, 8293-8297 (2005).
28. A. Alvarez-Arellano and J. Murillo, “Cuerpos de agua inferidos a partir de registro micropaleontologico (Radiolaria), en
sedimentos marinos superficiales de la Bahía de La Paz, B.C.S, Mexico”, Anales del Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y
Limnología, 1989.
29. A. Acevedo, “Behavior and movements of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, in the entrance to Ensenada de La Paz,
Mexico”, Aquatic Mammals. 17, 137-147 (1991).
30. J. Gómez-Valdés; J. Delgado and J. Dworak, “Overtides, compound tides and tidal residual current in Ensenada de La Paz
lagoon, Baja California Sur, Mexico”, Geofísica Internacional. 42, 623-634 (2003).
31. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2010, available at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/brp/raven/RavenOverview.html (accessed
November 2010)
32. M. O. Lammers and W. L. Au. “Broadband recording of free-ranging delphinid social acoustical signals”. Symposium of
Information Processing, Vallejo, CA, (1997)
33. L. J. May-Collado and D. Wartzok, “A comparison of bottlenose dolphin whistles in the Atlantic Ocean: Factors promoting
whistle variation”, Journal of Mammalogy. 89, 1229-1240 (2008).
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 11, 010001 (2011)
Page 10